Talk:Moors murders: Difference between revisions

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6; 7; 8; 9; 10; 11; 12; 13; 14; 15; 16; 17; 18; 19; 20; 21;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 22:07, 5 May 2015

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Moors murders article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21: 31 days

Moors murders is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on September 27, 2010.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
September 15, 2009	Good article nominee	Listed
October 3, 2009	Featured article candidate	Promoted

Current status: Featured article

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.

If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Greater Manchester FA‑class Mid‑importance

	Greater Manchester portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Greater Manchester, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Greater Manchester on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Greater ManchesterWikipedia:WikiProject Greater ManchesterTemplate:WikiProject Greater ManchesterGreater Manchester articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

British crime FA‑class (defunct)

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject British crime, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.British crimeWikipedia:WikiProject British crimeTemplate:WikiProject British crimeBritish crime articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Crime and Criminal Biography FA‑class Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Crime and Criminal Biography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Crime and Criminal Biography articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Crime and Criminal BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Crime and Criminal BiographyCrime-related articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.

Death FA‑class Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Death, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Death on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.DeathWikipedia:WikiProject DeathTemplate:WikiProject DeathDeath articles
FA	This article has been rated as FA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ian Brady was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 23 September 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Moors murders. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day section on July 12, 2013.

Brady's general election rant

This is in the news, although it probably isn't notable enough for the article.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 05:36, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That won't stop some editors trying to add it. Kind of fits, I guess. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:17, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is notable enough for a single lineAusLondonder (talk) 20:20, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Then you need to look up the definition of "notable", clearly. Cassianto^Talk 20:21, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It fails WP:10YT. Brady has ranted about all sorts of things in letters in the past.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 20:23, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

User:Cassianto - and you need to read WP:CIVIL and WP:NNC AusLondonder (talk) 20:25, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did once, and I vowed never to read it again. Cassianto^Talk 20:31, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Charming. I can tell. AusLondonder (talk) 20:33, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As indicated above, Brady mentioning the election is not sufficiently notable to be worth including in the article. SagaciousPhil - Chat 20:37, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think it might be more notable if he was a Green supporter. Currently, of course, he can't vote. Martinevans123 (talk) 20:41, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely agree with User:Sagaciousphil, this is not notable and should have never been inserted in the article. David J Johnson (talk) 20:42, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can't help but me amazed by your dictatorial attitude User:Sagaciousphil - what gives you the right to declare 'Brady mentioning the election is not sufficiently notable to be worth including in the article'? AusLondonder (talk) 20:58, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

But it's not just Phil, is it. At my count it's currently 5:1 against. Martinevans123 (talk) 21:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Make that six against; this is just fucking ridiculous. Eric Corbett 21:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(The above edit generously sponsored by the Northern Party.) Martinevans123 (talk) 22:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC) [reply]

@@ Line 54: / Line 54: @@
 :::::::But it's not just Phil, is it. At my count it's currently 5:1 against. [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 21:02, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
 ::::::::Make that six against; this is just fucking ridiculous. [[User:Eric Corbett| <span style="font-variant:small-caps;font-weight:900; color:green;">Eric</span>]] [[User talk:Eric Corbett|<span style="font-variant:small-caps;font-weight:500;color: green;">Corbett</span>]] 21:34, 5 May 2015 (UTC)
+::::::::*<small>(The above edit generously sponsored by the [[Northern Party]].) [[User:Martinevans123|Martinevans123]] ([[User talk:Martinevans123|talk]]) 22:06, 5 May 2015 (UTC) </small>